Slashdot Mirror
Publishers Scrambling for Wii Titles
Bloomberg is reporting on the publisher scramble for Wii titles, prompted by the console's explosive popularity since its launch late last year. Though the article focuses on EA's initial coolness on the console, they certainly weren't the only company that initially missed the bus. "Electronic Arts wasn't the only publisher slow to see Wii's appeal. New York-based Take-Two Interactive Software Inc., maker of Grand Theft Auto games, had no Wii titles when the player was released and now plans to have three this year, said spokesman Jim Ankner. Activision Inc., based in Santa Monica, California, plans to release six Wii games this year, giving the second-largest publisher a total of 11, said spokeswoman Maryanne Lataif." Though that's great news for Wii gamers, the question is: how many of these titles are going to be 'shovelware'?
Well, even if only 10% of the games coming out are worth getting, it will be that many more games that I might buy. And the experience the developers get by making a game for the Wii will (hopefully) make future games that much better.
There's always a few good things out there, and then there's the rest of it- something thrown out there in the vain hope some
fool will buy it to have some new game fix.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
The Piper Jaffray analyst says, "They're going to need to get their best-branded product on that platform. That will take a good nine to 12 months."
But if the big publishers rush Wii tiles out the door, the Wii could get a reputation for having nothing but crap ports, and lose some of its appeal. On the other hand, with the lag time involved in video games, market share might be cemented before that could happen.
Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
Couldn't they have started developing the games a bit earlier, and have them ready more or less when the console ships?
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
Sugarcoating: Developers are going to port their existing set of games to the Wii, but they're going to spend hundreds of hours fine-tuning the controls for the Wii Remote. The graphics won't matter because it will be so much fun playing on the Wii!
Real Answer: Developers are going to do a half-ass port of existing games to the Wii, and they're going to spend most of their time removing graphical features and figuring out how to read "waggle" from the controller. Since no one will actually optimize their games for the ArtX chip, the graphics will be substandard in comparison to the first-party Nintendo titles. Even worse, the games will have all the "fun" sapped out of them as the publishers don't yet "get" the Wii.
The end result? Miyamoto will need to yell louder.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I will probably get modded troll however this is just my honest opinion - I am bored of my Wii. I got one at the end of January. I didn't pre-order one as I wasn't all that sure it would be fun but I played on a colleagues one a few times and enjoyed it so decided to pick one up. I got Rayman, Zelda and WiiPlay as well.
At first it was a lot of fun however I soon found that lack of decent single player games and no online made the console a total bore for me. I tried to convince my wife that it was fun to play and while she did enjoy it the first couple of times she said it was "too robotic" which I do agree with.
I don't have people round the house all that often as we tend to go out. When we do have people round it is more to chat than play games. When I first got it and people came round we played but after an hour most people found the games too repetitive.
So basically it now sits under my TV doing nothing. I am a single player gamer and the Wii really doesn't work well for me. I had (still have but it is modded) an Xbox and used to really like Live however canceled my subscription after 2 years as I didn't feel I used it enough. I have thought about getting a 360 however it is too noisy for me so until they put in a quieter drive I won't be picking one up.
I really wanted to like the Wii however it just doesn't excite me, after the initial novelty wears off it does feel rather gimmicky and it doesn't really revolutionise gaming, it is just another form of input, it doesn't really add any additional depth to a game.
This will be my killer app. . .
Take Two is making a game for the Wii?? I have two words for that: Hot Coffee.
I'm not much of a gamer. I've never owned any console of any kind. I have played the Eye of the Beholder series of D&D games back in the day, and I liked Half Life 1/2 and Counterstrike. But I made do with whatever hardware I had. That's it.
And now, my time is taken up by work, bills, etc. However, the Wii is really starting to appeal to me, as it seems like a console you can just play periodically without being a die-hard. And the (more) physical nature of it is appealing.
However, I really would enjoy a 3D D&D type of game, where you use the wiimote as a sword and nunchuck to control a shield, switch to pulling the two apart like cocking a bow, even moving your arms like you're running and having that get picked up and move you along like you're running/walking, etc., etc. But, sadly, it doesn't seem like anything like this is in development.
Regarding the shovelware note, I do note that Eye of the Beholder is being made for the Wii, but it may turn out to be shovelware - just like the original, pseudo-3D game. That would suck.
Yeah but this console had so much hype and was so different than other console releases. You would think the dev's had to think this one just might make the cut.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
The only thing the Nintendo 64 did wrong was go with carts, but graphically it was better than the PS1, just more expensive to develop for because of those carts, and the only thing the Gamecube did wrong was launch late, since just about every bit of it was technically superior to even the Xbox.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
I suppose it's not worth pointing out that that handheld is currently outselling all other consoles on the market too.
When Walmart.com, etc. started offering Wii bundles, I was concerned that the bundles might only let you draw from a subset of all the Wii games sold by that retailer.
I was pleased to notice that when "Blazing Angels: Squadrons of WWII Wii" came out, it became a bundle option shortly soon-after at Walmart.com. Just a few days later, iirc.
Does anyone know: if a game comes to market and proves really popular, do retailers like Walmart.com tend to exclude it from being one of the game options that's included in the purchase of the bundle?
This post is going to sound trollish, but it's not intended that way. I like the Wii. I've got one.
But I don't get it. The Wii has networking and a CPU that is capable of decoding MPEG4 video. That sounds like a perfect replacement for my media PC! But the Wii only appears to be able to play videos from CDs. In this era of XBMC and AppleTV, why isn't there even a simple media centre program available for the Wii with network streaming?
When these companies have no Wii titles under development in November, but three to six titles now slated to come out by the end of the year, how can you expect otherwise?
Rob
Actually, most of the real porting is going to come from PSP and PS2 games, where the engines are a much closer match to the Wii. Doing an Assassin's Creed would be a complete re-write.
It'll be like it was on the DS -- the good stuff that's clever with the input device will begin appearing a year after release. The Wii is far cheaper to publish on, and if the market share remains respectable, yes, Shoeless Joe and the rest will come.
We've just gone through the worst time for quickie cash grab games. Q1 is the best of times for inferior games, especially the Q1 after the launch window. There's almost no AAA and very little AA competiton.
Far Cry: Vengeance is a perfect example of a cash grabber -- when the two other shooters are the market are mediocre, it doesn't seem quite as bad. Or look at Heatseeker, the PSP/PS2/Wii port. There's a little more effort there, but that game got far more attention than it deserved on merit.
There will be a few more in this quarter, but the shovelware will recede to normal levels after that. Paper Mario, Big Brain Academy, Mario Party, Pokemon, and MySims aren't exactly a killer Q2 lineup, but it's an improvement that leaves less breathing room for junk. The 3rd and the 4th quarters, as usual, will have a lot of big games.
Who cares about shovelware? In my opinion, it only adds to the appeal of the console. I'll give you a quick example:
There are just under 900 games for the Nintendo DS. Almost 300 of those work in North America. Of those 300, maybe 1/10th are excellent. The rest is shovelware. It's crappy ports, games that don't use the touch screen, clumsy interfaces, you name the fault - it's there.
Yet one reason why the system is doing so well is _because_ it has so many title. Every developer in the world wants a piece of the DS pie, no matter how small. This prompts the equivalent of an arms race, with developers trying to distinguish themselves by creating original or better games. You still get a ton of shovelware, but in the end, the consumer wins by having a huge selection of games and by having better games.
That is all your opinion. Sure the Nintendo systems may have had better graphics but that does not translate into the popular system. Ever since the N64 we have seen the offerings for Nintendo's systems fall way short of a good selection. Sure you have those few gems but overall you have a lot more to choose from with the PS1 and PS2 and now the Xbox. I was not knocking Nintendo, I was just pointing out how timid developers have been with their systems and now that may be changing with the Wii. I was only saying with the lack of developer support for the older Nintendo systems they might be wary about picking up the new one.
Where. Are. The. Fscking. Light. Saber. Games???
I saw the first Star Wars movie when I was 6 or 7. All potential Wii games are irrelevant, relative to the light saber game idea.
The N64 was worse in terms of graphics compared to the PSX. Everything on the N64 was cartoony. I was expecting Nintendo to drop out of hardware after the Wii. They seemed to just keep performing poorly.
reminds me of the animated gif named wiicoperitiveplay or something of that nature.
*Moves Wiimote like the handle of a digging shovel*
*Runs away*
/* No Comment */
Except Nintendo made the storage mistake again with the Gamecube, passing on DVD to use their mini optical discs. They also designed it, visually and ergonomically, in such a way that it seemed they only wanted it to appeal to children. The controller seemed especially bad to me when I used it - it seemed aimed only at children.
Give it time people! The Wii will come out with some legendary games, but it will take time. For one, developers don't have the experience with the Wiimote to implement it fully and functionally. Not only that, as online play becomes functional for games, the possibilities will increase ever more.
I picked up Need For Speed: Carbon the other day. Driving games are really fun for the wii, I must say. Now, all I need is a Star Wars game and a RTS game and we are set.
Looks like the Wii rules so much we will be able to drift our jacked cars in Tokyo soon!
...
Still looking forward to GTA: Emerald City (aka Seattle)
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
no they where cartoony for specific problems resulting from the SGI chip used and developers inability to be innovative in light of those problems (Factor 5 is a great example of a developer who DID deal with the problem and made incredible games because of it), but from a completely technical standpoint the SGI chip was 5 years of development ahead of the chip used in the PS1 (and not surprising, since the PS1 was based on Superfancom hardware that was pulled out and replaced with Sony produced stuff when Nintendo pulled out of the Play Station project.) It was the difficulty to develop for the 64 that caused issues, EXACTLY the same problems that both the 360 and the PS3 now are experiencing, the 360 in the fact that its not a carbon clone of the original because of the architecture change, and the PS3 because the Cell chip it's self is incredibly complicated.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
The fact that the big game companies were caught off-balance by the popularity of the Wii (clearly they were not reading SlashDot since last years E3 conference.) could be good for some of the smaller game companies. This will give them a window to launch titles and get some publicity and shelf space at retailers. In particular, HeatSeeker and Sadness both look interesting. The fact that the Wii is cheaper to develop for (I assume it's got a good SDK) and lower resolution (less time to do custom artwork) should also help the smaller development companies.
[Insert pithy quote here]
The OP was talking about the technical capabilities of the N64, not the artistic style that was used for the games (of which the PSX had the same fault as well).
psssst.. those were DVD's too. mini-DVDs.
Yes, but nobody (even Nintendo) expected the Wii to take off like it has. So they didn't start things early enough and now see there's money to be made.
...
Not true.
My son and his friends watched the E3 coverage and he sold his Sony stock within two weeks and bought Nintendo stock - he's made a killing.
88 shares and counting - I've got the other 312 shares, and it has been a sweet ride
Anyone who couldn't smell the end result was buying the hype and not paying attention to the reality.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The PSP sucks, its all crappy ports with weird controls, Nintendo rules.
wait a sec...
//TODO: Insert catchy phrase
Seriously. I haven't seen a single console in a store around here since the initial launch and only lately am I starting to see Wii accessories on store shelves. Is Nintendo planning on shipping any more consoles before the fad is over?
I have to ask ... are "crap ports" and "shovelware" really such a bad thing for the Wii, considering the new audience it's targeting?
It's pretty apparent that a significant part of the Wii's appeal is coming from casual or even "non gamers". These are not the players that get excited about a new Zelda game, or Metroid Prime, or Mario Galaxy, etc. Rather, they are comfortable with games with much more massive appeal (Wii Sports, Wii Play, various party games, etc.).
Sometimes that also includes licensed games (based off movies, TV shows, etc.), which are often regarded to as "shovelware" by hardcore gaming enthusiasts. Believe it or not, one of the better selling DS games in Feburary was Hannah Montana, based off the popular Disney TV show.
As hardcore gamers (and yes, I am one), I think we often forget about the massive number of other gamers there are, that buy and enjoy these types of games (otherwise they wouldn't continue to sell the way they do). As much as I hate to think it, Nintendo could probably do quite well business-wise focusing on just the casual audience entirely. Sure, they'll lose much of the hardcore fanbase, but more than make up for it in other ways. In the meantime, they'll always have the Nintendo faithful on board no matter what they do (these are the ones that need their Mario/Zelda/Metroid-fix).
-- jchenx
As someone who's worked on a multiplatform Activision game, I can tell you that the size of the GameCube disk was never an issue for us. In fact, early in development we'd burn CDs for the PS2 version as they're cheaper to burn than DVDs (they just have longer load times), and CDs are dramatically smaller than Gamecube disks.
As a similar example, making PSP shovelware has never been a storage issue in the slightest for us, despite UMDs having less storage space than DVDs. Really, the only companies that fill up the storage space on any modern disc system tend to be those using FMVs.
On the controller...it's nearly identical to a PS2/XBox controller. The only major difference I've found is that in God-of-War style sequences, when it says "push the ___ button", on the Gamecube that was always easy because I could look at the shape. On the PS2/XBox I'd be looking up and down at the pad because each button has some idiotically abstract name.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Agreed. The industry has needed a major shakeup in design philosophy for YEARS coming, but noone had the guts to do it until now. Nintendo basically took the lid off of the boiling proverbial kettle. If the DS weren't evidence enough, simply the reaction from E3 should have clued everyone in.
Now, the degree of success is up for grabs, not even *I* thought that it would be THIS big, but my suspicions are not really that far off. The teeny-bopper XBox and PlayStation crowd didn't want to agknowledge the Wii's possible success, because of its threateningly, "family oriented" stance. A lot of the game press is teeny-bopper centric, so a lot of people were blinded by their own personal bias.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Despite of what the article says, EA has release three great games for the Wii. They started out with Madden, which was great for an early Wii title. Recently, they have released The Godfather: Blackhand Edition (which is absolutely awesome) and the SSX game (which is great if you're into those kinds of games). They've also released a few sub-par games, but even Tiger Woods is quite nice.
If they keep up that quality level, I'm very happy. I doubt the Wii is going to be another Cube.
Also, if you have a Wii and only own Wii Sports, Cooking Mama and Super Monkey Ball, you have no right to complain about the games. At least get Zelda, Excite Truck, Wario Ware and Rayman, in addition to the EA games mentioned above. There are quite a bit of great games for the Wii available right now.
Oh, and your DS is collecting dust??? If the DS doesn't provide any games you're interested in, I'm afraid no console does.
What it comes down to, is that publishers for the Wii need to understand what it's being used for. I know my Wii is pretty much used as a group activity. The great single-player games will be far and few between. I know I always have the most fun with my wii when a group of my friends and I come stumbling home from the bars and attempt to bowl & stand up at the same time. If ninendo plays it out well, the Wii could be the biggest thing in dorm rooms around the country since posters with alcohol and weed references.
I use my DS (I actually have two) as my alarm clock. It works very well for me, I live in florida and when its stormy I lose power frequently. the battery charge lasts more than a week, as its in standby 23.8 hours of the day. Sometimes I'll grab it for some mariokart, but I'd rather play on my Mac. I'm looking at chipping my wii here in a few weeks, unless nintendo provides a compelling argument to stay legit for online games. We'll see.
Buy more games! Seriously. You can't expect one single player game to entertain you forever!
Here's a bunch of single-player games I like to get you started: Super Paper Mario (great fun), Madden, Trauma Center, The Godfather (the control change this from a mediocre GTA clone to an awesome festival of violence), Excite Truck (don't trust the reviews, this is fast, fun and, well, exciting), Elebits, SSX Blur, Sonic and the Secret Rings (first real 3D Sonic, ever - no, the DC games don't really count).
Check these out, I'm sure you'll like some of them. Just don't complain about the Wii if you don't buy any games.
At first it was a lot of fun however I soon found that lack of decent single player games and no online made the console a total bore for me.
But later you go on to say:
I had (still have but it is modded) an Xbox and used to really like Live however canceled my subscription after 2 years as I didn't feel I used it enough.
If you didn't feel you used Live enough to renew your subscription, then why are you complaining about the Wii's lack of online titles? They are coming (May, or June depending if you live in the US, or Europe), just not here.
I really wanted to like the Wii however it just doesn't excite me, after the initial novelty wears off it does feel rather gimmicky and it doesn't really revolutionise gaming, it is just another form of input, it doesn't really add any additional depth to a game.
If you like Golf, try Tiger Woods 07. The control isn't 100%, but it's damn good. Maybe 80%-85%. Other versions (360) are prettier, and other versions (PS2) have more courses, but the Wii one is the best IMHO as it hits enough of everything, and the control makes for a far more immersive experiance.
A new wave in sports games is coming soon. Personally, I am waiting for a golf game using that Wii controller.
Have you ever seen a PS game? Have you ever seen a N64 game? There's no comparison. The N64 beats the PS hands-down. The PS has one advantage: More storage space. That's it. Other than that, the N64's hardware, and the 3D capabilities in particular, are superior to the PS in every way.
I think the best thing to do right now with the Wii is to have a Gamefly subscription (like netflix). Its a lot cheaper and less hassle than buying a game, discovering its total crap, and trying to hawk it on Ebay. If its a rather short game or lacks replay value, the gamefly ends up a better deal as well. I've sent some games back within 5 minutes of playing them. I'm sure there are equally bad Xbox games too, but some of the launch titles were definitely rushed on the wii.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
I hear some are coming out late April.
Still not a hint of interestin Xbox or Playstation (tho I have looked at the PS2 as a sub til I can get a Wii).
Controllers and Nunchuks are finally in high supply at Fry's.
I have not seen anything like this in a couple decades.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
"Mass appeal" in terms of the existing gaming audience? Sure. However, is it something your parents or grandparents (assuming they're not already gamers) would get into?
Go to the middle of a busy intersection in a major city, and start asking random people if they're excited by a Mario or Metroid or Zelda game. Or heck, if they've ever played them before. You might be surprised by how few will answer yes.
Of course, if you change "Mario" to something different like football, or some popular TV show or movie, you're going to get a far different response. Now, if you want to bring it back to games, replace "Mario" with
That's truly mass appeal.
-- jchenx
You know, in my personal experience as a developer, for any reasonably modern system you can largely determine the power by looking at the RAM. The RAM determines how many polygons you can have, how detailed your textures can be, and if you run out of RAM, you crash. CPU/GPU etc mostly just determine framerate after you've squeezed all that content into the RAM. And at any rate, RAM is expensive so the console manufacturers never give us more than we can use.
*Gamecube has 24 MB of RAM, and 16 MB of nigh-unusuable crappy DRAM.
*PS2 I remember having effectively 28 MB of RAM (Wikipedia's claiming 32 MB, though, so it's possible I'm thinking PSP)
*XBox has 64 MB of RAM
This pretty much lines up with my experience. XBox is blatantly the strongest of the lot. Gamecube can theoretically beat the PS2 if you have a good plan for that sucktastic DRAM, it just requires specific optimizations. Most of the time multiplatform code will struggle on Gamecube, though.
Well, that's going too far. And I'm a huge Nintendo fan, but I hate stupidity. First of all, even I'm not going to claim that the GameCube was superior to the XBox. Sure, it had superior lighting effects, but it had less shaders and was slower, overall. I'd say that Nintendo's instance on clean design made up for it, though. But the console itself wasn't more powerful. The GameCube is a hell of a lot more powerful than the PS2, however. It's absolutely PAINFUL playing Tales of the Abyss on the PS2 after Tales of Symphonia (even though Abyss is the better game, overall).
For one thing, IMO, Cartridges are the one thing that Nintendo did RIGHT with the N64. They made load time an ISSUE, and a generation later, they were able to develop an optical based system with practically NO load times. They may have fallen behind for 2 generations, as a result, but it's going to pay off in the long run. Oh, carts weren't more expensive to develop for, they just didn't allow for as much data, and FMVs were becoming the big "new thing", that's why they lost FF7.
But let's be honest, I hate the XBox, but it has the superior hardware, okay? Let's just admit that Microsoft's lack of infrastructure, and their instance at marketting toward jar-headed jock-gaming, made for a lot of crappy material, and leave it at that.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
I loved the N64, but it had a controller designed for 3 hands. The Xbox had legitimate online play and a hard drive, both of which which the gamecaube did not.
You pretty much described how Zelda: Twilight Princess works. If you are interested in a Good D&D game (and are thinking of a Wii anyway), I highly reccomend: Baldur's Gate for the Gamecube, it isn't motion sensing or anything, but it's a fairly good action RPG that you can do (2 player) co-op .
A Wii Wish - Rocket Jockey
Not to mention that there hasn't been a day, since the launch of the GameBoy, where a Nintendo handheld hasn't outsold all the other systems on the market. The fact that the DS is outselling the Wii is nothing new... the fact that its outselling everything by so much is what's really impressive.
Handhelds outsell consoles... always have, probably always will... we get it. Let's move on.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Hopefully, the wii is expandable to the point where updated wiimotes can come out. Ones that can tell when it's pointed strait up. Because certainly games are not making use of that now. And the need to point at the sensor bar is sometimes frustrating.
I was just thinking about this, the whole rental thing sounded like a good idea.
What are you talking about? The Gamecube controller was certainly better than the PS2 or Xbox controllers, and far and away superior to the controllers of preceding consoles.
I'm a lawyer, but not yours. I wouldn't represent someone who thinks taking legal advice from Slashdot is a good idea.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
My best guess is that the popularity of the console is inversely proportional to the # of quality games produced. Not just percentage, but straight number. This is because the lure of low-budget (read: less time developing) games having strong sales is enough to ensure that no more, and probably less games of high caliber will make it to shelves.
No reason to put the time into a worthwhile endeavor when you can (probably) make a better profit off of "shovelware".
What <NOW LOADING> I <NOW LOADING> Can't <NOW LOADING> Stand <NOW LOADING> Is <NOW LOADING> Optical <NOW LOADING> Discs.
Go Back To Cartridges or Flash.
Sorry, you are wrong. SMB3 was the best selling console game at 18 million. Want to know how much Tetris sold for the original GameBoy? 30 million. And that's only on that portable. There are countless Tetris games and clones available on the PC, web, mobile phone, PDA, etc. Yes, I'm aware that Tetris was a bundled game, and that skews the numbers considerably. But I'm more interested in the influence and mass popularity of games. Being bundled helped it tremendously, just like how Wii Sports is gaining mass popularity from being a pack-in for the Wii. (And on a small note, the original Super Mario game sold even better, since it was also a pack-in game. That has far more influence than its predecessor.)
Want to know another mass appeal game that has sold like crazy, and was released less than a decade ago? The Sims, at 16 million (and that number is probably out of date by now). Most hardcore gamers, myself included, thought it was a fun game, but quickly got bored of it and moved onto newer things. However, the vast majority of gamers (who are not hardcore, don't read gaming sites every day, etc.), keep buying expansion pack after expansion pack. I don't think those numbers even include the Sims 2 sequel either.
I am not saying that the Mario brand is insignificant. In fact, it is the most influential franchise out there. That said, I still disagree that a Mario game is going to be the pinnacle of a "mass appeal video game". The numbers are actually quite telling, if you take a look at the sales numbers of Mario games after SMB3. It's going down, not up.
Again, try going to your non-gamer friends and family, and ask them if they have ever played or heard of SMB 3, or if they look forward to the next Mario game. The answer will probably be no. That said, those same folks are probably giddy about American Idol, or Lost, or the next James Bond movie.
I think you've fallen into the trap that most hardcore gamers fall into. That may be how we got into gaming. But why do you make the assumption that they're "going to want more"? The typical grandmother who has picked up a Wii because it's fun to play with her grandkids and maybe her friends from time to time, is not going to change her lifestyle and suddenly be into games like Zelda or Metroid, just because they happen to be on the same console.
... is rather absurd. We just don't see it, and I've been in the business for a while now.
As some who's in the casual games industry, I can tell you that most of the women that play our games adapt them to their lifestyle, not the other way around. Bejeweled gamers seek out similar puzzle games, and "bite size" games. They might try marginally more complicated games (such as Diner Dash, etc.), but there is such a huge leap to more "traditional" games, that your idea that they will eventually become fans of Starcraft, Call of Duty, Zelda, Metroid, Halo
Anyway, I'm not saying that short pick-up games are the only answer t
-- jchenx
If it turns out that the sword swinging experience is, in fact, going to be rather limited
I was also interested in seeing if FPS controls mapped better to the nunchuck+Wiimote combo, but I have also heard that it's a similarly troubled scenario.
-- jchenx
You could easily segment the area into several areas: the SoDo district, North Seattle, South Seattle, have some fun missions around Boeing airfields (jack some planes!), and then head over to the Eastside for some fun w/ the suburbanites (Redmond, Bellevue, etc.). There could be some fun easter eggs planted around the Nintendo and Microsoft buildings as well.
-- jchenx
You lost credibility by including Mario Sunshine as A+ title.
No, I remember my son and his friends spending hours playing that game - one thing I've found is that if you take an old Gamecube game and pop it in the top Wii slots, especially if you have some nice SD card for memory, the load times are gone and the graphics are much improved with no lags.
Makes it a lot more fun, especially if you still (like 90 percent of America does) have a 480p standard TV set.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Sadly, Sadness is vapourware.
...
Dang. That was one of the near release games that looked cool
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Unless you've actually programmed for those systems, you're just throwing up a strawman here buddy. Did you ever compare the PS2 and GCN versions of Resident Evil 4? Thats a true indicator of how way more powerful the GCN was than the PS2. There are sights that have done screenshot comparisons. Google them.
Once everyone got used to the Wii name just in time for E3, and after what happened with the Sony press conference, I probably should have bought some shares in Nintendo as well.
I think my biggest concern was that at the time, while the DS had taken the lead, third parties still weren't making a huge amount of money on the thing. I figured that third parties would find another excuse to avoid the Nintendo platform and stick with the Xbox.
Interestingly, it's clear this hasn't happened. I'd credit Ubisoft with the sea change if Ubisoft hadn't also supported the N64 and the Gamecube.
The Wii doesn't even have pixel shaders. Its basically two gamecubes duct-taped together.
Other than the novel input device, developers targeting the Wii need to basically use last-gen engines and techniques.
Has anyone else tried Godfather for the Wii? You can invert which way the camera rotates when you press left on the nunchuck, but nobody bothered seeing what else that changes. As you aim your gun crosshairs to the right side of the screen the system pans left, causing you to aim further right to hit your target. As you aim further right the system scrolls left FASTER. Good beta testing, too bad I can't download a patch to fix it.
Dekker Dreyer
Also, it would be interesting to see if we ever get a game that becomes successful (either in sales or reviews) that moves beyond the standard definitions of what a game is supposed to be. By that I mean, a game that's more than just fun. For example, there are many films that just feed on the entertainment factor: action movies with lots of heroics, exploding barrels, etc. They may be shallow in many ways (story telling, character development, etc.), but studios go after them because they tend to be popular and sell well. On the other hand, there are other films that focus on something different. They aim to be thought provoking, emotional, moving. They may not be as "fun" as your typical Bond flick, but they definitely leave an impression and are sought-after experiences in themselves.
If there ever were a game that wasn't necessarily aimed to be fun, but was otherwise thought provoking or similarly deep and engaging, I think that could resonate with non-gamers as well. The difficulty, though, is that it would have to be somehow approachable and playable by someone who isn't used to the normal conventions of "game playing". I would argue that Myst might have been close to doing this (although I never played it myself). And that was an extremely popular, and mass appealing, game. Another example I'd use is, surprisingly, World of Warcraft. There are definitely aspects of that game that aren't exactly "fun" (grinding for gold, levels, etc.), yet it has a huge mass appeal because of the social aspects it provides.
Going back to the Wii, there is the possibility that such a game could show up on that console. It has already proven that the Wii-mote, when properly used, makes it far easier to get into a game than traditional controllers. The next step is now coming up with the proper game that transcends just being "fun", yet also being something that people just want to experience for some other reason.
-- jchenx
Wario Ware has a micro-game where you're holding a sword and have to defend against an attacker. The gameplay is obviously very very simple but the sword movement seems to match the actual remote movement pretty well.
I'll assume you are talking about a general case, 'cause there were some games that flattered one controller more than the others.
The first one that comes to mind is Halo, since the xbox controller seems designed to play that game.
The one Wii I played at was fun-and it's nice and all to not use a controller. Just one problem-batteries. This is a problem because it makes enjoyable wasting money-er well not enjoyable. I may be a penny pincher- I just don't see the need or want to spend money on batteries for a controller. So is the lack of Wii's, the fact that it's a set-to-box, is cripled (aka "region encoded"), may-or may not eventually get a patch to "fix" DVD play back is a sure sign of desasteriously proffit driven vision- to a fault. I for one have absolutely no intention of supporting this type of decision making- and encourage others to do the same.
The Wii Remote seems to detect orientation just fine without using the optical sensor. The Wii Sports games illustrate this very well. In Tennis, Baseball, and Golf, the orientation of the remote is mirrored onscreen by the position of the racket/bat/club, all without having to point at the screen.
Or maybe you're complaining about something else, and I'm misunderstanding the problem?
The industry has needed a major shakeup in design philosophy for YEARS coming, but noone had the guts to do it until now. Nintendo basically took the lid off of the boiling proverbial kettle.
And what shakeup would that be? A gimmicky controller? Offering existing technology at a lower price point than its cutting edge counterparts? Unfortunately, I think consumers have looked at the bottom line and little else. They see $250, $400, $600, and think "Well, they're all NEW.. why pay double+ when I can get a NEW Nintendo for $250?" But in 2-3 years, about half the lifetime of a console generation, the Wii is going to look absolutely ancient. And while the games may still be enjoyable in their own right, everybody wants new things, otherwise we'd still be playing on our Atari's. So in order to cross develop, substantial features will have to be cut for the Wii versions of any sort of demanding title. The alternative is that publishers develop for the lowest common denominator, which doesn't seem like good news either.
The only reason the Wii is really winning right now is not about any sort of "major shakeup in design philosophy," but rather the complete and utter incompetence Sony has demonstrated in bringing (or convincing others to bring) remarkable titles to market for the PS3. If a solid selection of games existed for the PS3, neither the Wiimote nore the affordable price point would keep Nintendo in the lead. I believe it would still have a solid market share -- as well it should -- but nothing like the popularity it's enjoying right now.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
I always found it to be a toss up between the grainy, unfiltered look of the PS1, and the overfiltered, blurry image of the N64.
Personally, I prefer the sharper, grainy image of the PS1.
In retrospect, I probably should have proofread and better articulated my anti-Wii arguments.
Imagine X years from now when Hot New Title comes out. Either that title exists for only one platform, or it's cross-platform. If it's cross-platform, then it will likely be the least appealing on the most underpowered console -- the Wii. If it's single-platform (or worse -- 360/PS3 only), then it will only cause Wii owners to become disenchanted with their bargain purchase. This is why people upgrade in the first place. It's only a matter of time before this happens to any console, however it usually doesn't happen until a new generation is released. Since the difference between the Wii and the 360/PS3 is essentially already a generational gap, the lifetime of the Wii is inherently shorter than that of its competitors. The only reason the Wii isn't a complete waste of money is described in my second paragraph, above.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
"Better"? That's opinion, not fact. I didn't care for the GC controller, but I really liked the PS2 and XBox S-Type controllers.
There is a large market for the Nintendo-style games - Mario, Zelda, Super Smash Bros, Mario Party, DK, etc - appeal to a huge percentage of the market. A new console that is bargain priced with a gimicky input device (that is not so bargain priced) and the potential to play online versions of some favorites (like Smash Bros) may be part of the formula that works for Nintendo.
Also, accessibility to non-gamers, and participation of non-gamers is quite amazing to me (I've seen it).
Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got some idea balls to remove from a manatee tank.
I disagree. If power was that important, the PS2 would have died one year into it's life when the Gamecube and X-box (both more powerful systems) were launched. HD Graphics aren't as important as the typical gaming press wants to believe. Final Fantasy seems to have done well only supporting 480i.
People do want the best of what's available, but once again that doesn't mean graphics... So far EA has (surprisingly) been able to take several franchises and successfully launch them on Wii in a way that is new, better and more immersive than is possible on any other system. Madden, Tiger Woods, and The Godfather are all made better on the Wii by their intuitive and immersive control schemes.
I have a Wii60, and as pretty as Fight Night Round 3 looked on my HDTV, I can't wait to buy Round 4 on the Wii.
Your problem, good friend, is that you think of "power" in terms of graphical performance.
I'd say the PS3/360 are VASTLY underpowered compared to the Wii - power being defined by an easy, intuitive, FUN interface. A cross-platform game on all 3 systems will sell far more on the more powerful system, I agree. That system being the Wii.
Witnessing the last 4 months, the market so far agrees with me.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
You're going to base that assessment on ONE ported game?
Ok, I can do the same. Look at Splinter Cell: Double Agent. Utter disaster on the GC, and not too bad on the PS2. That's a true indicator of "how way more powerful" the PS2 was than the GCN.
Back back to reality, I've seen great looking games on both systems, and I've seen games that look like shit on both. While the GC hardware was a bit more powerful, it was always up to the developers to make use of it. Sadly, few did.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Tiger Woods 07 is out, and real good. There was also 'Super Swing Golf' (Pangya Golf in Japan) that is more fantasy and less sim oriented. Personally I like the swing mechanic in Tiger or WiiSports Golf over Pangya, but it's a matter of personal preference. When in doubt give them both a rent.
Will Take-Two be releasing Table Tennis for the Wii?
Witnessing the last 4 months, the market so far agrees with me.
As I mentioned, I believe that's expressly due to the lack of games on the PS3 and the lack of foresight on the part of consumers. The "market" doesn't have any feelings either way -- we simply have different ways of interpreting it. Of course we may never know which interpretation is correct, so the argument is largely academic.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Novelty of the controller will wear off? That people will get tired of "inferior" hardware? Twenty years ago, people said the same exact thing of the NES.
When the NES came out, 16-bit gaming was done on game centric computers (PS3 and Xbox 360 are considered game centric computers). The NES sported a new controller that disrupted the joystick, had lots of mini-games (Duck Hunt and World Track Meet come to mind), and made gaming more accessible (not everyone wants to play at the computer). NES was marketed as a family friendly console and, one of the bonuses, was that it was seen as a virtual arcade machine (where one could play all the great arcade games of past and present) which is similiar to how the Virtual Console is percieved today. NES kept selling out, year after year, in both Japan and America just as the Wii is doing now.
Everyone, and I mean everyone, said the NES's early success was a novelty of a 'toy' and that all gaming would return back to the game centric computers. It never did. Electronic Arts refused to support the NES until investors threatened to fire Trip Hawkins.
Wii is still selling out six months after launch. Yet, it is still a 'fad'. I guess the DS Lite is still a 'fad' and 'novelty' too, huh?
I'm looking forward to Tiger Woods on the Wii (I saw it on a retailers shelf here in the UK, only to be told 'it wasn't for sale yet' at the counter) and that's entirely due to the control system. I don't think I'd ever buy it for the 360 though (playing golf on a regular controller just doesn't appeal to me). The poor graphics on the Wii do put me off though (and I'm already avoiding some Wii titles because of how blurry and indistinct they look on my HDTV).
Except that by and large, the Wii interface decisions aren't very good. There are a small handful of games that use the interface uniquely and very well (SSX, WarioWare, Trauma Center, Elebits, etc.) and a handful that use it unimaginatively, but well (racing and FPS games). The rest--and particularly the cross-platform ones--graft awkward gestures onto a traditional interface.
The problem with the Wii controllers are that they're -so- suited for their element that once you take them out and try to do a traditional setup on them, they kind of suck. There aren't enough buttons, what there are are weirdly placed, and they're all the same color and size in a cluster. It's kind of an ergonomic disaster...until you play a nice 1st party game with a Wii-specific interface. Then they're awesome.
So yeah, cross-platform is going to be a killer. With the control issues and the musclepower issues, count on them almost universally sucking on the Wii unless someone does a platform-specific spinoff (e.g. Spider-Man 3)
I think the Wii is an excellent second console, just like the GameCube was. But it's not going to keep up as a primary console. There are just too many compromises.
I have been gaming just since the 8 bit Nintendo days. I am probably one of the few that picked up Zelda twilight princess and can't think of any way to play Zelda after trying the Wii version. Other than the length (and the crappy fishing) I can't find any major flaws in Zelda. Unless they were to go back to the isometric overhead perspective. The graphics aren't photorealistic on the Wii but you don't need movie graphics to have a great game. Just great art. I like all the art in the games I have purchase from zelda, raving rabbids, to excite truck. They are cartoony but have a great distinct style that I enjoy. I really like the direction the Wii is going and am happy to wait a bit while every one else catches up to what I have known ever since I saw the first demo for it. I have never bought a system before the first price drop since the 8 bit days. I am really happy with my purchase and know that this is the true next gen. I only buy games for the Wii that generally can only come out on it and can't be done anywhere else. I still like to play a game or two of Wii bowling and would die for some multiplayer.
I can wait for everyone else in the industry to catch up to what Nintendo knew all along, that the Wii is something special. I have plenty of old PS2/ PC games to play. And since I never owned a GC there are a lot of AAA titles I never had access to before.
This is where, honestly, many ports would probably be best developed with using the GameCube controller--or the classic controller--in mind. Then, the controller issues become much less significant. Honestly, sports games and most RPGs would probably benefit from a separate team dedicated to Wii control.
Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
As of January, he had two friends with 360s, several with Wiis, and none with PS3s. At no point did he ever give the illusion that he was interested in the PS3 over the Wii - at least, not since the price points and launch lineups were announced. It wasn't just the price; if he really wanted a PS3 he's the kind of kid who would have saved up for it. But he also said there were no games for it he wanted, while he actually bought Zelda on launch day and held onto it until he got the Wii.
I think that, yes, maybe the game press was blinded by their own bias - but I don't think that it had anything to do with the reality of teeny-boppers or any other crowd.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
It's not a gimmick, any more than the DS was.
I think people will lose interest in the Wii's controller around the time people realize that mice, trackballs, and tablets are just gimmicks and go back exclusively to arrow keys.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Yeah. Smash Bros is going that route, which I think is a smart one. Once there are a couple of high-profile games that do that, perhaps more companies will consider it an option. Right now, I suspect they would view it as losing the one differentiating factor for that game.
Actually, both consoles have the exact same resolution, so I'm not sure where "blurry" comes in. Maybe the N64 tried to upsample the picture and made it blurry, while the PS simply showed the low resolution. Eitehr way, the N64 can push a lot more polygons than the PS.
Since no one will actually optimize their games for the ArtX chip, the graphics will be substandard in comparison to the first-party Nintendo titles.
With 1st-party titles like Wario Ware and Wii Sports, I can't possibly imagine how 3rd-party games could have graphics "substandard in comparison". You can praise Nintendo's Wii titles for many things, but graphical fidelity is certainly not one of them.
(...queue response about Twilight Princess... yadayada - I think Wind Waker was a more visually impressive game)
"A gimmicky controller?"
Do I need to read the rest of your comment? Wii-fanboi against PS3-fanboi, oh so interesting.
Can you tell me that if the Wii's controller is so gimmicky, why did Sony include motion sensing in their new controller? Can it be that even the people at Sony HQ thought the Wii was on to something?
Man, I hate these stupid, pointless conversations. NINE CORES ZOMG! "Serious" gamers need more power! You're being taunted by the ads that say that the cpu in your PS3 is smarter than you are. You cannot be serious.
The N64s main limitation was its 4 Kbyte texture cache. So you had to sort polys by texture rather than depth for best performance. The PS1s main limitation was it was not 3d - it did not support perspective texture mapping. That just hurt to look at. Also it did not support filtering or mipmapping. It could have bigger textures since IIRC it did not have a cache so it was all coming from slow memory :-). The difference in CPU power was enourmous also (33Mhz PS1 with no floating point versus ~100Mhz N64).
The controller is EVERYTHING, without it there's no interaction.
The Wii controller is fun for a while. But it does get really boring to use after a while. I finished Twilight Princess and then sold the console (for a hefty profit mind you) and then went and bought an Xbox 360. Their controller is way nicer than any last gen controller, and it beats the Wiimote for responsiveness. Oh and by the way, titles and gameplay make gaming fun. MS realizes this and is buying up every exclusive they can. In 2 years the Wii will have had a couple of good games, then just like the Gamecube, will be relegated to kiddies.
Sorry, I hoped that Nintendo would win this time around, but maybe on the 2nd gen of their new tech (with better visuals) but by then MS and Sony will have copied them and then it comes down to the games once again.
As a hardcore gamer, personally, I would prefer Wii Sports 2 to Manhunt 2, too.
There is absolutely not evidence to back that up. During the last generation, the Gamecube was the cheapest console. The PS2 still won. People don't just run out and buy the cheapest console. People buy the Wii because it is genuinely a lot of fun to play with it.
That's really all there is to it.
If you still call the Wii controller "gimmicky," you do nothing but betray your fanboyism. Have you played "The Godfater: Blackhand Edition"? This game alone is proof that the Wii controller is anything but a gimmick.
People play with the Wii because they want to. Because it's an accessible and fun. No amount of good PS3 games can change this. The people who love to play Wii quite simply won't switch to the PS3 for games like FF or MGS.
And yes, if you can't see the change in game design philosophy from the GBA/PS1/PS2 to the DS/Wii, you're blind.
Bullshit. One word: Godfather.
I own a Wii and a PS3. I would never buy a golf or tennis or bowling or boxing game for the PS3. The Wii has spoiled those genres for me. Either it's on the Wii, or it doesn't exist to me. I don't care if Virtua Tennis looks so real it'll blow my brains out of my ears. I don't want to play it unless I can use the Wii Remotes.
Right now "the market" consists of people who've yet to get their hands on a Wii at all and still think Wii Bowling is the best thing since sliced bread.
Many of us who were fortunate enough to get a Wii console at launch have long since moved on from Wii Sports and on to....what? Besides Rayman and a couple of other titles, there isn't much to speak of on the Wii right now. And, remember, the so-called casual gamer doesn't buy a whole lot of games by definition. Many posters in this thread got it right: The Wii is already a generational leap behind in graphics and horsepower - this isn't even the PS2 vs. XBox, this is XBox 360 vs Gamecube, essentially. The Wii is riding a huge wave of hype, but I think it'll quickly go the way of the Gamecube unless they have compelling exclusives. I'm sorry, but I'm not trading the beauty and online play of Tiger Woods 07 for the 360 for a tacked on swing gimmick with no online play, etc. It needs games now that have compelling features and better use of the Wii remote. Exchanging a swinging motion for a button press isn't creating a more immersive gaming experience...it's just a more annoying way to press a button.
And before you chalk me up as a graphics whore, remember that horsepower and graphical prowess aren't just there to make objects more shiny - Dead Rising, with its hundreds of on-screen zombies, could have never been done on the Wii like it was on the 360, and that translates directly into a poorer gameplay experience on something as underpowered as the Wii.
power being defined by an easy, intuitive, FUN interface.
Hahaha, awesome. I define power as which is the whitest, so obviously the PS3 is vastly out-powered by the 360 and the Wii.
I hear you. A game like Rayman, or Zelda can look better due to a stylized art design. That gets harder to do for 'realistic settings'. When I started playing Tiger I thought 'Holy PlayStation 2 Batman'... The graphics are low detail compared to what the Wii is capable of, and looks like it was lifted from the PS2. The graphics are the weakest link in the whole production. That being said, swinging the remote as a club, (having the 'hit' sound from the speaker) pulled me right into the game. It even picked up my natural slice. I have been playing it for hours a day since I got it last week. The control isn't 100%, and it isn't a 1:1 mapping of your swing like in WiiSports Golf, but if you have a clean swing in real life you'll do well. If you don't, then maybe it'll improve your swing. :-)
N64 is not even 20% of an XBOX, I can play many N64 games on the xbox in the emu.
Now on the PC, the EMU is even better. awesome for small 12-64meg games. Instant start too.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
who thought that Rockstar should have been right on porting Rockstar Presents Table Tennis to the Wii.
I like how the anonymous coward can post about how the other controller is better on "responsiveness", without any kind of supporting evidence or data.
You say it gets boring. I say it doesn't.
I think the people who think it's "boring" are missing the point. The goal is not to be constantly aware of the controller; the goal is to forget about it. The Wiimote is not impressive because it stays new so long, but because it is instantly familiar.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
The second gen xbox controller wasn't bad, but the PS2 controller just sucks. It never fails that my fingers start to go numb if I play for an extended period of time. Never had that problem with the Cube controller though. I also like the button layout better than the diamond shape.
its not called pixel shaders and dont use the offical patented Direct X Pixel shader asm,but surely can do indirect texturing and color combination as any shader 1.1-1.4 card
This has already happened and it's made not a bit of difference. Gears of War is the hot new game, yet it hasn't managed to slow down Wii sales at all, they're still sold out.
Halo 3 and GTA 4 both come out within the next six months, I imagine that the target market for those games is aware of that and knows they won't be on the Wii. Does it matter to Wii purchasers? Apparently not.
Personally speaking I'll be getting a Wii this Xmas and probably a 360 eventually, when the price hits $150. For HD ultraviolence my current needs are well served by a PC, what I lack is fun local multiplayer stuff and neat new controllers. So long as party games keep coming out for it I'm content - and I know they will, Guitar Hero, Bust-a-Move and DDR are coming, the install base is already big, at this point there's no way it won't be supported and it has enough processing power for anything in that genre of game.
This sounds like terrible news, actually. Consider this: the only truly fun or original games on the Wii are first party. This is because they are created around the Wiimote. They take advantage of it and they feel like a natural extension of gameplay that is the only true selling point the Wii has.
Then comes third party games. A company like Take 2 is saying they're going from zero games to 3 games on the Wii in one calendar year. Since most games go in a 2 to 3 year cycle, that means these will be ports. They'll be ports of PS2 or Gamecube era graphics (not shock considering Wii is not capable of anything more) and they'll likely have tacked on Wiimote controls.
If I was a Wii owner I'd be upset. They have a game drought like everyone else, but when the waterfall comes for original IP on other consoles, their games will be ports with tacked on controls. Hey, I wish I was wrong, but it's not looking good for them.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
For me it was:
1. Rayman
2. Zelda Twighlight Princess
3. Godfather
4. Tiger Woods
Then again, it's a good day when I can get 2 hours of gaming in. So I have yet to complete Godfather, Tiger Woods is too much fun (only wish it had network like the PS2). And my wife spends her time still collecting golden bugs/Poe souls in Zelda.
I hear Second Opinion is good, as well as a couple of the Virtual Console games. Your milage will vary of course, but there seems to be enough quality gaming to be had for the last 5-6 months on the Wii.
I am billdar, and I approve this message.
what if light sabers did not act like solid, but the attenuated beam "shorted out" for a moment when two beams crossed? Continuing a swing with a dead blade would not damage your opponent (nor he you). Whenever you recover and change the motion the blade can reinstantiate. Not G. Lucas's lightsaber, but easily doable on a Wii.
More music, fewer hits
I was pretty sure my post(s) would draw some vehement responses, but yours was the most succinct, so I'll just reply to it.
During the last generation, the Gamecube was the cheapest console. The PS2 still won.
The difference in price was negligible, to the point of irrelevance.
If you still call the Wii controller "gimmicky," you do nothing but betray your fanboyism. Have you played "The Godfater: Blackhand Edition"? This game alone is proof that the Wii controller is anything but a gimmick.
Look, everything is either a gimmick, or a genuinely useful feature, and the only way to "prove" the difference is to measure the staying power. As someone else mentioned, the mouse is not a gimmick because it serves a function that was previously difficult/impossible with then-conventional devices. Nonetheless, the VR helmet, Power Glove, and Light Gun are prior examples of input devices which ALSO served a function which was otherwise difficult/impossible, but their sustainability was obviously limited. You might as well say "Duck Hunt" proves the Light Gun isn't a gimmick.
Fanboyism? I haven't owned a console since the PS1; I just like to bet on the horse who will win the most, and I simply don't think Nintendo's lead is anything other than a temporary fluke. The Wii is filling the gameplay void left by the lack of titles for the PS3. If Wii is still the preeminent platform in 2 years, then obviously I bet on the wrong horse. It happens. I was wrong about the Amiga too. Fortunately we all have wonderful PCs now because people picked cheap commodity hardware over innovation, foresight and, admittedly, horrible marketing and management.
People play with the Wii because they want to. Because it's an accessible and fun. No amount of good PS3 games can change this.
Nonsense. Some amount of good games can change it.. the question is not if, but at what point? Obviously it's relative to the number and quality of titles put out for the Wii. I don't think the concept is sustainable, but again, Wii'll see.
And yes, if you can't see the change in game design philosophy from the GBA/PS1/PS2 to the DS/Wii, you're blind.
I am blind, you insensitive clod.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Most likely scenario: Developers will do a half-ass ports of existing games to the Wii, and they will still be more fun. Examples: Far Cry Wii, Monkey Ball (although Kororinpa is better), Trauma Center.
From what I've heard, the Wii middleware uses neural networks to derive movement patterns from the developers' motion input - the same way you program a voice recognition program, but with movement. So the developers don't have to spend all their time figuring out how to use "waggle".
I have. I can tell you, for instance, that for Gamecube, Nintendo decided to define int as s64 (WHY NINTENDO? WHY?)
Mind you, I might not fit Slashdot's definition of "programmed" in that I spent my time looking at C++, not assembly, and didn't write the engine from the ground up myself, rather joined a programming team of 10+ mid-way through. (I am -now- doing engine work, but for a 360/PS3 title).
I'm not going to claim to be the world's expert on Gamecube, far from it, but my coworkers as well as some friends I have who work at EA all have relatively similar oppinions (roughly XBox > GC > PS2, with GC having some unique quirks that mean you can't just copy code from PS2 to GC, whereas you generally can just copy from PS2 to XBox).
I'm in the same boat (well replace PS3, with 360 and it's identical) I pre-ordered a Wii and was able to get it on Launch day (November 19th). On November 20th I put all my Golf, and Tennis games on ebay. There is simply no going back.
That sentence makes no sense. If something is either a gimmick or a genuinely useful feature, then something is shown to not be a gimmick due to its useful nature. As I said, play Godfather on the Wii. This shows that the Wii Remote isn't just some gimmick only useful for games like Wii Tennis or Bowling.
If I had used Wii Sports to show that the Remote isn't a gimmick, your argument would make sense. Geez, look at the games available for the Wii. It's clearly proof that traditional games can be enhanced by the Wii Remote (see Godfather), and that innovative new games are possible (see Elebits).
Comparing the Wii Remote to a peripheral with only one clearly defined use - such as a dancepad, or a light gun - makes no sense at all.
Dunno, I think the Amiga 500 was one of the most successfull computers ever.
The whole premise of your argument is utterly devoid of reason. You're basically saying that people would rather have a PS3, but since there are no games, they buy the Wii. This is, in a word, absurd. People buy the Wii because they want to play Wii Sports. I've seen non-gamers buy a console for the first time in their lives because they saw Wii Bowling. No game on the PS3 could ever convince them of buying a PS3. They have no interest in the PS3, and they would never even touch a PS3 controller (which I know because I own both a PS3 and a Wii). Yet they bought the Wii.
These are also not the people who need to buy a new game every week. The fact that Nintendo hasn't released an A-list Wii game for a few weeks now does not matter to them. It matters to me, but I doubt I'm the typical Wii owner.
I think that the PS3 and the Wii serve different markets, and there's only a very small overlap between these two markets. Most people who are interested in the Wii quite simply do not have the slightest interest in the PS3, and most people who are interested in both consoles will happily buy both. The PS3 can't harm the Wii. I can harm the 360, though.